From: Bethany Blakely Subject: Fwd: Sap flux check-in Date: June 28, 2017 at 6:01:43 PM CDT To: Ankur Desai Resent-From: desai@aos.wisc.edu Information about metadata: ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Bethany Blakely Date: Sun, Jun 25, 2017 at 5:30 PM Subject: Re: Sap flux check-in To: Zachary Taebel I'm attaching my metadata here since that is ready to go. Some clarification on column headings: Site SYV - Sylvania Wilderness WCR - Willow Creek SPP: species ACSA - Acer saccharum BEAL - Betula allegheniensis FRPE - Fraxinus pennsylvanica OSVI - Ostrya virginiana TIAM - Tilia americana TSCA - Tsuga canadensis SENSOR: sensor number; corresponds to sensor/timeseries number in flux data DBH: diameter @ breast height CC: canopy class. Not requested, but I find that it explains a lot of variation in sapflux D - dominant; above main canopy level C - codominant; at main canopy level I - intermediate. Somewhere between C and S S - suppressed. Well under main canopy, mostly shaded BA: basal area, cm^2 SWA: sapwood area, cm^2 (allometric) SWD: sapwood depth, cm (allometric) Multiplier - correction for radial variability as mentioned in previous email. Normal flux calculation of flow rate * sapwood area is multiplied by 'Multiplier" to obtain the corrected flux. Bark thickness - all NA's; did not measure this. BA_spp_prct - percent basal area occupied by species in an 80x80m 'stand' surrounding the flux tower (this is the area where I did intensive surveys). Let me know if some other version of this works better. Species for which I did not measure sapflux account for ~3% of basal area at SYV and ~20% of basal area at WCR.